User:Natureab30/Falling Creek Reservoir Ecology/Dmpopson Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Natureab30


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Falling creek reservoir
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Current article

Evaluate the drafted changes

 * Lead
 * There is a lead paragraph in the existing article, but and introduction to the information added for the lake ecology information needs to be added to it.
 * Content
 * The introductory content stating what the article is about and its relevancy was not entirely necessary to include. It didn't really add important information as to the limnological aspect of this project. The real-time forecasting system information was good and has room to be expanded on. The algal bloom research was a good example of influential current research on the lake.
 * Tone and balance
 * The intro doesn't seem entirely neutral. Speculating on the importance of the lake and the interest and history of it feels like it is there to convince the reader of that idea.
 * Sources and References
 * The references that are used seem to be good quality and reliable. There is a fair bit of information in the article that is lacking a citation. Additionally, there are several direct quotes that could likely be removed and expressed in a different format. The links to the references work.
 * Organization
 * The organization of the article is not the most clear. Section headings could be included to better differentiate and introduce the topics covered in the article. There are one or two typos, but otherwise the spelling and grammar are good.
 * Images and Media
 * there wasn't any media added to this article yet
 * This is not a new article
 * Overall Impressions
 * This is a good start for the article. The information could be reworked a bit and a more citations are needed, but the general ideas seem good.